National Republican., 1887-11-02
THE COMMERCE. COMMISSION.
The Public Must Enjoy Special Rates
or the Sales Stop.

The Public Must Enjoy Special Hates
or the Sales Stop.
The interstate commerce commission yes
terday gave decision In the case OF David
+. Allen g. Co. against the louisville, New
Albany and Chicago Railway Company.
II is accompanied by written opinion pre-
pared by Commissioner Cooley, OF which
the following Is syllabus
In this case the complaint is that the de
fendant violates the fourth section OF the
interstate commerce law by charging more
for ehorter than for longer distance
over the same line In the same direction.
The facts are that defendant has line OF
to Michigan City, passing through Indian
apolis and Frankfort At indianapolis th.
road is crossed by east and west lines, which
give rate on wheat to New York OF -
cents 100 pounds. At Frankfort 1t Is
crossed by another road which makes q rat.
to New York Of 25 cents. AT South Wana
tab defendants road Is crossed by the New
gan Ci ty II intersects the Michigan Central
Defendant wishes to participate In the grain
carving trade to New York, and the Michi
gan Central Will receive from 1t at Michigan
City grain taken up at Indianapolis and pro
rate with Il the 90 cent rate on mileage
basis. The New York, Chicago and st.
Louis will receive from 1t at South Wana.
tah the grain taken up at Frankfort and
pro rate with II the 20 centrate on mileage
basis. Defendant has been In the practice OF
taking wheat at Indianapolis on these terms,
and it received q carload from complainants
at Frankfort and charged the % cent rate.
The indianapolis shipments are carried
through Frankfort on their way to Mlchi.
gan City, and the whole distance from
indianapolis to New York by Michigan City
is greater than from Frankfort to New York
by South Wauatah.
1t appeared by the evidence, however
/. That by the direct line indianapolis is
nearer to New York than Frankfort Is by
its direct line, and is given lower rates for
that reason.
3. That defendant receives greater COM
pensation for its haul from indianapolis to
Michigan City than 1t does for Its haul from
Frankfort to South Wanatah, and conse'
quently does not, on It's own line, charge
more for the shorter haul.
3. That defendant does not and cannot
control the fixing OF rates by the crossing
and intersecting lines, and has no option
but to accept those rates which are fixed
and pro rata upon them or to cease to take
grain altogether.
These facts show no violation by the de
fendant OF the long and short haul clause
for the longer distance, aud IL the whole
charge to New York is the greater for the
shorter distance 1t is only because tn"
Michigan Central CHARGES less on Its owl
line than does the New Yoik, Chicago and
st. Louis.-defendant having no control OF
either.
il 1t is desired to test the reasonableness
| OF the through rate from Frankfort to New
York, all the roads responsible for 1t should
| be made defendants. 1t Ia not enough t.
make the initial road defendant, une'a
| that road has authority to take the rate TO-
them all.
The conclusion is that the complaint is
not5suetained.
A decision was also rendered in the case
| of w. U. Smith VS.. The Northern Pacific
Railroad Company In regard to selling
special classes of tickets to land seekers OF
explorers. The commission notifies thu
railroad company TO desist from selling
either of the special class of tickets al
rates less than the regular rates charged tc
| the public.